> Then I tried Modula-3 on Linux. When I later got to know Haskell, I found
> that I had reinvented lazy evaluation for Assampler. Consequently I moved to
> the original. I wanted to integrate music composition and signal processing.
> I wanted programming features for music arrangement, since the many trackers
> known from Amiga did not offer much structuring and thus required a lot of
> copy and paste. I wanted programming features also for signal processing,
> since the interactive graph editing became cumbersome for repetitive signal
> algorithms like vocoders, although I already added some support for them to
> Assampler.

Coincidentally, my ambition was originally also to integrate music
composition and signal processing.  That is, I would like to be able
write both 'echo phrase' to play phrase with a note-by-note echo and
'reverb phrase' which would play phrase but apply a sample level
reverb to it.  With most current systems you have to fiddle around
with setting up a separate reverb, setting up its control inputs,
manually hooking your score language's knobs up to the reverb's knobs,
etc.  And then there's 'retrograde phrase' vs. 'reverse phrase' to
apply music-level and audio-level reverse respectively... most
existing systems force you to do an awkward two step process where you
record the output of phrase and then re-input it as a sample, then
reverse it.

It's not just a pure academic interest either... it's musically useful
to e.g. tune a comb filter to a musical pitch, or apply a special kind
of reverb to a single note, and it's a hassle to manually set up all
the plumbing to get that to happen.

To my eyes the problem is in the score vs. orchestra division that
starts with music-n languages like csound and goes all the way through
midi sequencers.  Nyquist is the only language I know of that tried to
tackle that.

However, I've basically given up on that for the moment in favor of
just generating MIDI.  Just composition is already really complicated
without throwing signal processing into the mix.  So I wish you best
of luck on the signal side, maybe when things on both sides mature I
can steal^H^H^H integrate some of that work and finally have the
top-to-bottom solution I dreamed of...

Coincidentally, I also got my start on the Amiga... perhaps early
exposure to trackers let to my dissatisfaction with MIDI and the
typical MIDI sequencer :)  My current project winds up looking vaguely
like a programmable tracker.

> liveliness. The typical memory leak works as follows:
>  let (prefix, suffix) = splitAt largeNumber xs
>  in  processA prefix ++ processB suffix
>  Although this can be perfectly processed in a streaming manner, sometimes
> GHC does not manage to release the pointer to the beginning of prefix and
> thus prefix is kept until the processing of suffix starts. I wonder whether

Just out of curiosity, how do you find out when this is happening?
_______________________________________________
haskell-art mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.lurk.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-art

Reply via email to